Listen To The Article
French presidential envoy for Lebanon Jean-Yves Le Drian will visit Beirut between July 17 and 23 on the second leg of his mission aimed at finding a solution to the ongoing and lingering presidential crisis, according to French sources. However, the final date of his visit is yet to be confirmed.
Among the proposals that Le Drian intends to put forward during his visit is the suggestion to hold a dialogue focused on the stalled presidential election. Nonetheless, such a dialogue would probably not be initiated nor sponsored by any internal party, notably by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, because it will most likely be rejected immediately.
Consequently, the aspired dialogue could be sponsored by the international community, namely the five countries of the Paris Group, consisting of France, the United States, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt. International mediation is deemed crucial for ensuring the success of a dialogue, especially if it is combined with Iran’s backing.
The French sources emphasized that all local stakeholders in the presidential crisis would have a say in the dialogue, and their diverse viewpoints would be considered, since the primary objective of such effort is to reach a consensus among political opponents to overcome the current deadlock.
But Lebanese political sources are skeptical that the Shiite Amal-Hezbollah duo would agree to a dialogue under international mediation, fearing that the outcomes may counter their objectives. These include electing a president aligned with their obstructive axis, and retaining a so-called “blocking third” which enables them to impose their will on future governments and secure desired ministerial portfolios, particularly the Ministry of Finance.
To consider such a dialogue, the Shiite duo would also require that discussions include a comprehensive revision of the entire political system, such as the distribution of state powers among the various communities, the sources said. In their (Amal-Hezbollah) view, the call for international involvement is primarily a request from the Christian community and the dialogue would solely revolve around the presidency and in favor of Christian interests.
Therefore, they will resort to escalation by proposing a new formula for Lebanon, which will fluctuate between two extremes. While the first would propose a tripartite power-sharing arrangement enshrined in the Constitution, the second would seek to take advantage of the existing balance of power to seize positions that are traditionally held by Christians.
However, Amal and Hezbollah will encounter significant challenges in achieving their objectives if they face opposition from both internal and external political forces.
